telecom@ucbvax.ARPA (04/28/85)
From: Jon Solomon (the Moderator) <Telecom-Request@BBNCCA>
TELECOM Digest Sat, 27 Apr 85 21:53:15 EST Volume 4 : Issue 183
Today's Topics:
Phone-A-Friend hits the stands...
re: Surge Supressors for Telephones
Re: Wrong Number
Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #181
Re: Common Data Carriers
Which network would *I* pick?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 19850424-1938EST
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA
From: TURNER%UMASS.BITNET@WISCVM.ARPA
Subject: Phone-A-Friend hits the stands...
Well, it seems that the underground has really hit the overground.
For a small price, you can now call Phone-a-Friend in Worcester, MA
(617/550-5000 but you can't call it 'cept from Worcester|). Just like
the old conferences that populated the California telephone underground
in years past (tho' I think a few are still up), this little baby
has its share of morons who yell obscenities, but unlike the old conf's,
PaF seems to have a moderator. I haven't heard one mentioned in the radio
spots -- anyone with info want to share it? Also, any idea when these
will be standard for most cities?
Joe
[reply to CUTTER@MIT-OZ.MIT-MC.ARPA]
------------------------------
Date: 24 April 85 19:08-EST
From: Michael Grant <GRANT%UMDB.Bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
To: Telecom Digest <TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA>
Subject: re: Surge Supressors for Telephones
Most, and someone please correct me if I'm wrong, modems are optically
isolated from the phone lines, (or isolated in some way). That means that
there is no 'electrical' connection between your computer, and the phone
lines themselves. An Optical Isolator is a device that converts the signal
into light, (usually with a small LED), and back into electricty, (usually
with a photo-transistor.) This effectivly detatches the equpiment from
the line. Now, to tie this in with surge supressors. When a surge comes
down the line, it's not supposed to burn out your modem, just this opto-
isolator instead...if even that.
From direct experience, I find modems pretty durrable to the phone lines.
Once lightning hit something on my house, and destroyed most of my computer.
The only thing left was the modem. I've never had a modem die due to an
electrical storm. Ever seen a phone go out due to a surge?
A surge supressor isn't going to make your connection look better when a
spike comes down the line. When that spike hits the line, your data is
going to be splattered all over the place. Not even the fanciest
equipment is going to be able to recover those bit.
All in all, I'm pretty negative toward the idea. I don't speak for everyone on
the list. I'm sure that there are people out there that will disagree with
me. If it makes you feel more secure with one of these on your phone line,
get one. Oh, and better make sure you get one for the electrical outlet
too if you havn't already.
There just seems like there's a glut of computer crap you can get for your
home computer these days, that no one really needs like keyboard covers, key
cap enlargers, screen filters, power line conditioners (to make it a smoother
sine wave!), lazy-susans for monitors... And what gets me is the price.
The people who sell this stuff think us computer people have *lots* of
money to spend on this crap. (Some do, I suppose.)
-Mike Grant
------------------------------
Date: 24 April 85 19:47-EST
From: Michael Grant <GRANT%UMDB.Bitnet@WISCVM.ARPA>
To: Telecom Digest <TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA>
Subject: Re: Wrong Number
This is what finally happened with that collect long-distance wrong number
call I recieved a few weeks ago. Let me recap what happened. I got this
call in the middle of the night, the operator asked me if I'd pay for this
call. I immediatly said, "NO." So, she put the call through anyway. When
I finished talking to the person, (she wanted to speak to someone named Joe)
I flashed the key to get back to the operator. She told me that she couldn't
(and wouldn't) give me credit for the call, and that I'd have to get the bill
and call my local phone company.
Anyway, I got the bill, and called C&P (my local telco) I explained the problem
to them. They told me that I'd have to call AT&T to get credit because it
was an AT&T operator who screwed up. So, I called AT&T. They told me that
they had nothing to do with the billing, and that I'd have to take the
matter up with my local operating company. I called C&P back again, and
explained my problem again. After much hassel, It was finally decided that
AT&T didn't have the power to take such a call off my bill. The call then
got removed from the bill, (the tax too!)
Since divestature, service has degraded SOOOO much. "We don't care, We don't
have to. We're the phone company" Someone has got to start up a phone
company to compete with Bell on the local level. I think then, they'd
have to listen to their customers, (while they still had them.)
-Mike Grant
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 85 10:59:35 pst
From: hplabs!vienna!bob@Berkeley (Bob Toxen)
To: ames!hplabs!ucbvax!telecom@Berkeley
Subject: Re: TELECOM Digest V4 #181
In reply to Lauren's comment on billing irregularities of non-AT&T long
distance carriers:
1. In the six years that I've heavily used MCI there was only *one* case
where I was incorrectly billed. It took only a three minute phone call
to a rather pleasant lady to get credited. During the same time when my
AT&T/Pacific Telephone business phone went out completely it took AT&T
*three weeks* to fix it!
2. A forty mile phone call over MCI (Mtn. View to San Francisco) at 1200
baud munged a character every few minutes (AT&T doesn't do much better
on this route). With a 40% discount over AT&T the occasional UUCP
re-try would be well worth it.
3. When was the last time *you* dialled the wrong long distance number?
I think that most people will be overjoyed when they randomly get switched
to MCI and realize a 40% savings (less 2% for wrong numbers) over AT&T.
4. I find that MCI lines to be of equal *or higher* quality than AT&T,
probably because of modern equipment. MCI from San Jose to Wash., DC is
consistently better than AT&T!
If I sound biased, I am, towards lower cost, higher quality phone service.
I have no monetary interest in MCI.
Bob Toxen "System V. Consider it SUB-standard! (My opinion)"
Silicon Graphics
{ucbvax,decwrl,ames!vienna,dual,its}!olympus!bob
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 85 18:27:43 EST
From: Ron Natalie <ron@BRL.ARPA>
To: "M. D. Parker" <mike@LOGICON.ARPA>
Cc: telecom%bbncca@Nosc, mike@logicon.ARPA
Subject: Re: Common Data Carriers
I access a database that is on UNINET, TYMNET, TELENET, and DUSNET.
I'v only used TYMNET and TELENET, and TYMNET is far superior. TELENET
is one of the most exasperating experiences I've ever had.
-Ron
------------------------------
From: figmo@tymix.Tymnet (Lynn Gold)
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 85 17:56:16 pst
To: TELECOM@BBNCCA.ARPA
Subject: Which network would *I* pick?
Why, TYMNET, of course! :-)
Seriously, Tymnet has more nodes than either of the others you mention;
it is also more secure. I have used TELENET as a private user, and
it is MUCH slower than Tymnet, but since you're not going to out-and-out
believe someone who works for one of them, I suggest you look at a study
done by DATAPRO Research Corporation (they're in Delran, NJ) which compares
TELENET, Tymnet and several other companies.
--Lynn Gold
...tymix!figmo
["The opinions expressed here are probably the same ones my company would
express, had I bothered to ask the marketing dep't."]
------------------------------
End of TELECOM Digest
******************************